Analysing Product Development Process and PLM Features in ...

HAL Id: hal-01764186https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01764186

Submitted on 11 Apr 2018

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open accessarchive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-entific research documents, whether they are pub-lished or not. The documents may come fromteaching and research institutions in France orabroad, or from public or private research centers.

L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, estdestinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documentsscientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,émanant des établissements d’enseignement et derecherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoirespublics ou privés.

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution| 4.0 International License

Analysing Product Development Process and PLMFeatures in the Food and Fashion Industries

Elisa D’avolio, Claudia Pinna, Romeo Bandinelli, Sergio Terzi, RinaldoRinaldi

To cite this version:Elisa D’avolio, Claudia Pinna, Romeo Bandinelli, Sergio Terzi, Rinaldo Rinaldi. Analysing ProductDevelopment Process and PLM Features in the Food and Fashion Industries. 14th IFIP Interna-tional Conference on Product Lifecycle Management (PLM), Jul 2017, Seville, Spain. pp.509-521,�10.1007/978-3-319-72905-3_45�. �hal-01764186�

adfa, p. 1, 2011.

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Analysing Product Development process and PLM

features in the Food & Fashion industries

Elisa d’Avolio1, Claudia Pinna2, Romeo Bandinelli1, Sergio Terzi2, Rinaldo Rinaldi1

1University of Florence, Department of Industrial Engineering, Florence, Italy

[email protected], [email protected],

[email protected] 2Politecnico di Milano, Department of Management, Economics and Industrial

Engineering, Milan, Italy

[email protected], [email protected]

Abstract. The food and fashion industries are well-known as areas of excellence

representing Italy globally. Their products include innovative features, have short

lifecycles and a high level of customisation. Both the pipelines have to respond

quickly to unpredictable demand in order to minimize stock-outs, forced mark-

downs, obsolete inventory and they focus their Supply Chain (SC) strategies on

quality and time-to-market. Although they are characterized by many different

aspects, both leverage on the same point of strength: their internal Product De-

velopment (PD) process. The opposite occurs in the automotive industry, with its

standard and functional products and its efficient pipeline centred on cost reduc-

tion. Starting from previous works presented during the last PLM conference

(PLM16), the research aims at investigating similarities and differences between

these sectors, focusing on their PD process and their main critical success factors.

Moreover, the authors analyse how Food and Fashion companies are managing

the entire set of information throughout PD and the strategic role of Product

Lifecycle Management (PLM). In order to reach these goals, a multiple case

study analysis has been performed, involving companies belonging to the Food

and Fashion industries. The results will be relevant both for academics and prac-

titioners. Indeed, there is a literature gap about this topic, because of the lack of

researches concerning Food and Fashion PD. From the practitioners point of

view, the results of this work will help Food and Fashion companies to support

their business analysing the PD process and to better understand how the use of

the PLM system could improve it.

Keywords: Product Development (PD); Product Lifecycle Management

(PLM); Food Industry; Fashion Industry; PLM for Food and Fashion, Food and

Fashion.

1 Introduction

Product Development (PD) represents the core process for many industries focusing on

product quality and innovation. Food and Fashion companies are trying to streamline

this process in order to reduce time-to-market and to be competitive in the international

scenario. The two sectors are particularly linked in Italy, where they embody parts of

the three F (food, fashion and furniture) driving “Made in Italy” to its success, due to

the innate history and culture, creativity, design and lifestyle [1]. In this concern, the

Food and Fashion are the two sectors where Italians trust more concerning the “Made

in Italy” brand [2].

At first glance, Food and Fashion appear to be different and distant environments,

especially because of product features from the final customer viewpoint. The fashion

industry stresses the not-essential customer needs, i.e. the ones related to the irrational

sphere of our mind. On the other hand, the food industry produces, more than other

sectors, vital items that every customer chooses day-by-day; yet it also delivers more

“fashionable” products that clients could do without (in particular processed foods, as

chocolate, sweets, jams and so on). Hence, fashion could be recognisable in all those

products that satisfy emotional and temporary needs, including food products. Moreo-

ver, analysing both the supply chains from the companies’ perspective, they prove to

be configured as “market responsive” instead of “physically efficient” [3]: their primary

purpose is to respond quickly to unpredictable demand. Other similarities are related to

product design and management. According to Fisher [3], Food and Fashion deliver

innovative products instead of functional ones, characterised by short lifecycles, high

contribution margin and high variety. Furthermore, they are also special products in-

stead of standard ones, as suggested by Christopher et al. [4]: they are not stable in

demand and include a high level of customisation.

An interesting leitmotiv between Food and Fashion supply chains is that PD repre-

sents the core process; in fact, it is always conducted in-house to retain the control over

the involved tasks and resources. In this context, the use of the PLM system in support

of PD process for both industries could be considered as a key driver of innovation that

allow them to be successful in the market. Starting from previous works presented dur-

ing the last PLM conference (PLM16), this research aims at investigating similarities

and differences between the Food and Fashion sectors, focusing on their PD process

and on their main critical success factors. Moreover, the authors analyse how Food and

Fashion companies are managing the entire set of information throughout PD and the

strategic role of PLM. The second section of the paper explores the literature related to

Food and Fashion supply chains and PLM functionalities in order to pave the way for

the further case study analysis. Then, section 3 describes the methodology used to con-

duct the research and to obtain the main results, using both questionnaires and inter-

views. In the section 4, the findings coming from the analysis of the interviews are

shown. Finally, the paper concludes by presenting some thoughts and future research

directions.

2 Literature review

The first step within this study has been to gather as much information as possible about

Food and Fashion supply chain chains, in order to distinguish the PD tasks and how

they are linked with the other supply chain processes.

The fashion supply chain has been classified as agile [5] because it is market sensi-

tive (closely connected to end-user trends), virtual (relying on shared information

across all supply chain partners), network-based and process aligned (high degree of

process interconnectivity between the network members). Food supply chain is not

framed in a specific classification (e.g. lean or agile), but much interest is payed to its

networked structure where producers, distributors and buyers/retailers [6][7]contribute

to generate value. Food and Fashion supply chains are above all described through case

studies [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] and their processes appears to be very business-spe-

cific, so that a diagram of a generic fashion or food supply chain is still missing.

The second step through the literature review has been devoted to the PLM function-

alities supporting PD in the Food and Fashion industries.

For the fashion industry, in particular, PLM means clear visibility into PD, sourcing,

and pre-production processes and a more collaborative approach, through every phase

of the lifecycle. Even if PLM is spreading since a decade within the fashion industry,

very little is known in literature about PLM features and functionalities, while most of

the papers are related to automotive cases [15]. Just few authors [16][17], have dis-

cussed PLM implementation and adoption in fashion companies, highlighting the need

for tailor-made functionalities.

PLM is becoming a very important solution also for the food industry. The use of

this system allows food companies to provide different benefits, including: higher effi-

ciency and productivity, increased product quality, reduced errors, greater profitability

in PD and ensured regulatory compliance [18]. In this concern, several contributions

dealing with themes related to the different phases of the product life cycle, (Beginning

of Life BOL, Middle of Life MOL and End of Life EOL [19]) have been found in the

scientific literature. It is also true that the term “product lifecycle management” [20] is

a very broad topic [21][22]. Indeed, considering the entire life cycle of the product,

PLM is not often used as a unique term but it is more common to find other terms that

indicate one of its specific phase, a specific method or the software names used in the

different stages. In conclusion, it could be said that the level of knowledge of the PLM

systems is still low also in the food sector from the literature point of view. As a result,

the major part of the publications concerning PLM in the Food and Fashion industries

is actually based on analyses conducted by consulting societies and specialized maga-

zines. The lack of papers about PD process and PLM functionalities in Food and Fash-

ion industries has triggered a deeper investigation into several companies, through a

case study analysis, in order to reach the objective of this study.

3 Research methodology

Case Study methodology has been adopted as research strategy. This works well with

exploratory research because it can give those initial insights that are needed to find for

the explorative cases [23]. In this work, multiple embedded case studies [24] have been

applied to Food and Fashion companies. The aim of this study is to analyse the main

Critical Success Factors (CSF) [25] in the two sectors, the PD activities [26] and how

information are managed through PLM. In a first moment, the analysis has been held

separately. In fact, two questionnaires with common topics and sections have been de-

veloped (customised for each specific sector) and then submitted to the selected com-

panies to be investigated. Indeed, before to start the analysis, a common structure of the

two questionnaires has been defined in order to obtain results that could be compared

once the interview process was completed. The first step has been the identification of

CSF, which are a limited number of key variables or conditions that have an impact on

how successfully and effectively an organization meets its mission or the strategic goals

of a program or project. Then, the PD process has been analysed and linked to the PLM

functionalities, in order to investigate both process and information management.

The questionnaire has been divided into three sections. After that, the questionnaire

structure has been defined and adapted for each sector. The next step was to identify

the reference sample, so that the two analyses could be compared. In order to achieve

homogeneity in the sample, companies selected have to respect all the following re-

quirements: constituting a brand managing finished products, being owned brands, hav-

ing at least a BU in Italy and an international profile and being medium-large firms

established in their business for several years. After this first screening, it was decided

to select those companies that are: (i) conducting PD activities in-house; (ii) showing

different market positioning based on price (from low-end to high-end companies); (iii)

including, for food companies, “fashionable” factors in the product (as a packaging

with a certain appealing, the choice of a specific ingredient just for a specific period

trend, and whatever is not primary food).

At this point, two groups of companies operating in the food and in the fashion busi-

nesses have been selected.

The five fashion companies interviewed manage leather goods, shoes and ready to

wear products. According to [27] the cases range from the luxury market segment

(cases 1, 2 and 3) to the lower-end brands (cases 4 and 5): this market segmentation is

based on price levels. Case 1 and 3 conduct all the supply chain processes internally,

while in the other cases production is outsourced to suppliers located in Italy and in

Europe. Three cases have already implemented a PLM solution, while the remaining

are using Product Data Management (PDM) and are evaluating to adopt PLM. Two

main clusters have been identified: high-end/luxury companies, selling leather goods,

prefer to focus on CSFs as quality and innovation and to retain in-house the majority of

supply chain processes. They need to achieve innovation also in data management and

have implemented an industry-specific PLM solution. The second cluster includes low-

end companies, selling outerwear and childrenswear, that are competing on time to

market (TTM) and decide to outsource production to suppliers. They are still not able

to manage product information through PLM.

The seven food companies interviewed manage milk and yogurt, pasta and sauces

and confectionery products. All the companies interviewed decided to outsource the

distribution and sales phases. This is due to the fact that all the companies consider as

core phases the R&D, purchase and production: this is the reason why they decide to

leave them internally, being the phases that add more value to the final product.

Furthermore, food sector could be classified through different market segments bas-

ing on product categories: fresh products (case 1 and 5), pasta and canned food (case 2,

4 and 6) and confectionery products (case 3 and 7).

Moreover, just two companies are using the PLM system, while the remaining are

adopting PDM and ERP. Some of the companies intend to adopt the PLM solution,

while others do not even know the meaning of this system and the related benefits.

The selected companies have been contacted and asked for their willingness to be

investigated through a case study; the companies analysed have been finally selected

among those which indicated their availability for a field investigation. Case studies

typically involve multiple sources of information [23]. In this research, they are: two

questionnaires, which have been used as a guideline for many semi-structured inter-

views with the company’s managers (IT and R&D managers); semi-structured and open

interviews (the latest coming from consulting activities). Both questionnaires have been

earlier validated and tested. Then they have been sent to the company’s IT and R&D

managers and discussed through an interview. The collected results have been elabo-

rated and submitted to the company’s managers for approval. In conclusion, the results

obtained from the case studies have been validated by the company’s top management.

Once the responses of the two different questionnaires have been analysed, a compari-

son between Food and Fashion results has been performed and similarities and differ-

ences have been found.

4 Findings

This section describes the results coming from the case study analysis, deepening first

of all the CSFs and challenges of the companies interviewed. Then, PD process, the

related activities, data management and the role of PLM are analysed for both Food and

Fashion industries.

4.1 Critical Success Factors

A background to acknowledge the strategic choices of the cases analysed is required to

introduce the topics of PD and PLM in the Food and Fashion industries.

Fashion companies are orienting their efforts to improve products quality and to

streamline their pipelines reducing TTM. Innovation is another important CSF, given

the continuous progress entailed by new technologies and the attention paid by custom-

ers to digitalization. The luxury companies (cases 1,2,3) also leverage lots of their stra-

tegic decisions on the craftsmanship behind the manufacturing process, and on the

brand reputation. While, companies belonging to the low-end market segment (cases 4

and 5) try also to reduce costs, transferring the manufacturing process to countries with

cheap labour. These strategic goals are accompanied with several challenges, as (i) the

need to develop premium quality products, (ii) the importance of style and design, (iii)

the “Made in Italy” origin and (iv) the increasingly shorter product lifecycle.

Concerning the food industry CSFs, companies are focusing more on: quality, costs,

customer satisfaction and TTM. As in the Fashion industry, also for the food compa-

nies, innovation is considered a key factor to improve and to develop a new product,

ensuring its success in the market. Companies operating in pasta and confectionery sec-

tors (cases 2,3,4,6,7) are more focused on the innovation of the product, in terms of

meaning (changing the aesthetic of the product and assigning a certain meaning to a

certain product) [28]. The reason why they decide to bet to the innovation of the mean-

ing is usually related to two main factors: the product is not a primary food (in fact they

produce sweets and pasta) and/or the recipe complexity is low (few and standard ingre-

dients). On the other hand, company producing fresh products (cases 1,5) are more fo-

cused on quality, customer satisfaction and nutritional factors. These companies pro-

duce products subject to high perishability and are addressing to very important and

delicate markets (such as food for children or elderly). The food industry faces different

challenges, such as: (i) retail consolidation, (ii) ineffective innovation, (iii) increasing

regulatory requirements and unclear regulations, (iv) empowered consumers, (v) in-

creasingly complex global supply chains, (vi) sustainability, (vii) TTM.

4.2 PD activities, data management and PLM functionalities

Interviews and direct contacts with R&D and IT managers have allowed to analyse

business processes, with a particular focus on PD and on how information are managed

throughout product lifecycle. Figure 1 and 2 represent outlines of processes, tasks, PLM

functionalities and other software solutions that Food and Fashion companies have val-

idated and approved in a general meaning. PD and production are the main processes

that constitute the beginning of life for Food and Fashion products and that have a re-

lationship to PLM. Sub-processes are also aligned in Food and Fashion cases: planning,

recipe/collection development, prototyping and test, engineering and production are

representative of all the companies interviewed. Information related to PLM function-

alities, are based on the cases that are using it: they have implemented the same indus-

try-specific solution, adding several customizations to the out-of-the box configuration.

Results from fashion companies Concerning the fashion cases, PD begins with collection planning, when the Top

management and Style managers take decisions about new collections, basing on

budget, revenues, margins and analyses of market needs. Industry-specific PLM solu-

tions include two main functionalities supporting collection planning, which are Mer-

chandise Planning and Calendar: The Merchandise Planning module supports collec-

tion, product, and colourway planning by season to meet business objective. The Cal-

endar module allows scheduling activities and milestones, both for products and mate-

rials. Office automation often completes data management with additional reports and

aggregated information. Then, collection is developed: new products and carry over are

identified, together with colourways and main materials. In PLM, the Product Specifi-

cation module allows to define product details and build collections and the Material

Management module is adopted to define materials, compositions labelling and mate-

rial samples. At this stage, colour libraries are created, thanks to a specific PLM func-

tionality, storing and grouping them by different criteria (e.g. season, collection,

brand…). During the prototyping & test stage, the fashion product is still in a prelimi-

nary status, based on a sketch and few details. A preliminary fitting, that test the proto-

types on models, is performed for shoes and ready-to-wear products. In addition to the

modules described for collection planning, the Technical sheets and BOM management

functionality is adopted to create bill of materials and to link products and materials.

Creative solutions and CAD (Computer Aided Design) constitute additional software

to manage prototypes and are usually interfaced with PLM. When the product pro-

gresses to the engineering stage, it is a sample developed just in the base size but infor-

mation about its costs and its components are defined. Size range management, Costing,

Sourcing and Quality modules become important in PLM: the size maps are defined

(they are particularly used for ready-to-wear products); information related to costs,

suppliers, quotations, testing methods, procedures and expectations on materials and

products are managed. During sales campaign, fashion companies are able to collect

orders and to organize their production, whether it is conducted in house or outsourced

to suppliers. PLM allows to arrange a collection book through a proper module, con-

taining products approved during sales campaign, and, interfacing to the ERP, manages

also the order entry. Only within the production stage, all the product information are

definitive (colours, sizes, material consumptions, bill of materials, costs, packaging,

care labels). In addition to the previously described modules, the Composition and care

labels functionality permits to develop and edit product composition and it is often in-

terfaced with labelling software solutions. Finally, the fashion product will be shipped

to the warehouses and to the Retail or Wholesale channel for sales, but at this point

PLM is not involved. Reports and Data packages are produced throughout the entire

PD process, so a specific functionality has been provided in PLM. The same happens

with team collaboration and user management: the system administrator may decide

any time to assign specific privileges to groups of users, basing on the task they are in

charge to.

Fig. 1. Processes, tasks, PLM functionalities and other software in fashion companies

Processes

Tasks

Sub-process

Product Development Production

Planning Collection development Prototyping & Test Engineering Production

· Market analysis· Budget & revenues

analysis· Merchandise

meetings planning

· New styles and carry over development

· Colorways definition

· Materials research

· Sketching· Product features

and preliminary BOM

· Preliminary fitting

· Fitting · Product features

and sample BOM· Sample requests

and BOM to suppliers

· Product costing· Order entry· Sales campaign

· Engineering· Fitting and size

development· Quality

requirements· Definitive BOM· Costs analysis· Packaging and

labeling

PLM functionalities

Other software

Merchandise planning

Calendar

Office automation

Product specification

Color libraries

Material management

Technical sheets & BOM management

Sourcing & Suppliers management

Costing

Order entry

Collection Book

Reports & Data Packages

Quality

Creative solutions Creative solutions

CAD CAD

ERP/MRP

Composition & care labels

Size range management

Office automation Office automationOffice automationOffice automation

CAD

ERP/MRP

Labeling solution

PLM team collaboration & user management

Results from food companies Concerning food companies, the PD process starts with the phase of planning. The

process usually begins with a market analysis, in order to understand the customer

needs, the competitor positioning, with the different comparisons with industry stand-

ards (benchmark) and so on. Once the external factors have been fully defined, the next

step is to identify if there are already similar products in the company portfolio. A

brainstorming on technical and economics features is conducted in order to identify the

product characteristics. Then, a first feasibility phase has to be developed, in order to

evaluate the idea, formulation, equipment, packaging and financial feasibility. When

this phase is concluded, a product brief is defined. The PLM functionalities supporting

this preliminary phase are: Product portfolio and data management (supporting the con-

tinuous cultivation of product sets by prioritizing and managing PD and retirements),

PLM team collaboration (supporting the collaborations between different teams and

company functions) and Report specific to the industry (enabling the facilitation, auto-

mation, and control of the entire development process). The second macro-phase that

characterize the food PD process is the recipe development phase. The first activity

characterizing this phase is the recipe development. Once the recipe has been devel-

oped, this undergoes various evaluation stadiums (usually internal), starting from a la-

boratory validation, then a pilot plant validation, the industrial plant and finally a legal

validation. The PLM modules supporting this phase are: Specification management,

Formula/recipe management and Regulatory compliance. Formula and recipe manage-

ment solution sustains the recipe development and its management. Specification man-

agement allows to capture the descriptions and quantities of ingredients, materials and

other content, including process information needed to produce, package and ship a

product. Regulatory compliance enables to identify what regulations, policies and ob-

ligations are applicable to the developing product. These functionalities support all the

next phases of the process. If the recipe passes all ratings, then it is possible to move to

Prototyping &Test phase. In this phase the production of the first prototypes is done

observing if the realized products follow all the input specifications. A small batch of

product is produced in order to be tasted both internally and externally. After that, the

results of the tests will be analysed in order to understand whether changes to the recipe

must be done. Therefore, a very important process characterizing this phase is the sup-

pliers’ selection. This phase is supported by the following PLM functionalities: Label

and artwork management, Costing and Quality. Once the product is fully defined, it is

possible to develop labels and artwork for different markets conforming to their pref-

erences and regulations. Furthermore, product quality and costs are measured. These

functionalities support the next PD phases, in order to constantly monitor costs and

quality factors. The next macro-phase of the food PD process concerns the Engineering

stage. The process owner verifies if the production line can handle the new product

manufacturing. Different tests are performed, as industrial, quality, transportation and

quantity tests. After that, quality tests must be done in order to check the quality of the

industrialized products. It is usually produced a small number of products to check is-

sues related to a small production. Finally, one or more transportation tests have to be

done in order to understand how the product reacts to the various conditions during the

different transports. Completed the Engineering phase, the actual production (bulk pro-

duction) and the product launch are carried out.

Fig. 2. Processes, tasks, PLM functionalities and other software in food companies

4.3 Discussion: similarities and differences between Food and Fashion

industries

The parallel interviews to Food and Fashion companies are compared in this section

and several similarities and differences, influencing process and information manage-

ment, are outlined. The main similarities and differences are listed below:

Table 1. Food and Fashion Similarities and Differences

Similarities & Differences Description

Similarities

Importance of the PD process The case study has confirmed the relevance of PD in both

the industries. PD is characterized by the same number of

phases, assuming also the same meaning for both sectors

Customer-centric product design Both the industries recognise the customer central role in

the PD process

Importance of product innovation Fashion companies have demonstrated how innovation is

appealing for new consumers. Also, the food sector is fo-

cusing heavily on product innovation, which is gradually

becoming one of the key factors that characterize successful

food companies

High number of items Food and Fashion companies manage lots of product varia-

tions, due to the high number of colourways for the fashion

industry, and to different packaging and market-related cus-

tomizations for the food industry

Processes

Tasks

Sub-process

Product Development Production

Planning Recipe development Prototyping & test Engineering Production

· Market analysis· Product features· Concept

development· Product brief and

validation phases · Feasibility analysis

(idea, formulation, equipment & packaging)

· Financial feasibility

· Recipe development

· Recipe tests & feasibility (Lab internal tests, legal validation, compliance with industrial plants)

· Prototyping· Product internal

feasibility · Product external

feasibility· Check test results · Review recipe

development (if needed)

· Suppliers selection

· Industrial tests· Quality tests· Transportation tests· Quantitative tests· Check issues related

to a small production

· Review recipe development (if needed)

· Bulk production· Timing (logistics,

production, planning and commercial)

PLM functionalities

Other software

Office automation

Specification Management

Formula/Recipe Management

Regulatory Compliance

Label and Artwork Management

Costing

Product Portfolio and Data Management

Quality

CAD CAD

ERP/MRP

Office automation Office automationOffice automationOffice automation

CAD

ERP/MRP

PLM team collaboration

Report specific to the industry

Importance of industry-specific PLM

solutions

The cases have demonstrated that a general-purpose PLM

system is not able to fit the needs of Food and Fashion com-

panies. This is the typical situation in which “one size does

not fit all”. Both the industries require several functionali-

ties that ask for an appropriate data model, provided by a

custom solution or an industry-specific PLM, developed by

a vendor with a particular focus on the sector

Differences

Issues related to product obsolescence Food product lifecycle is highly influenced from obsoles-

cence and expiration dates while for fashion products, their

lifecycle length is just a matter of seasonality and new

trends

Issues related to regulatory compli-

ance

PD in food companies cannot overlook regulatory compli-

ance and market constraints. This is not an issue in the fash-

ion industry

Differences in the sale channels Fashion companies need to control the sales channels: the

large part is also managing the Retail channel, as brand

owners. Food companies sell their product to MRC (mass

retail channels), losing any control over the sales channel

Differences in data model The typical fashion item is an SKU (stock keeping unit),

composed of a model, a colour and a size. The same struc-

ture is not replicated in the food products, which are char-

acterised by a recipe and the value-added information come

from the balancing quantities, more than from the single

components

Different customer perception of

product design

Even if design is fundamental for both the industries cus-

tomers directly perceive product design in fashion items

while, for the food sector, the appealing design is associated

to the packaging more than to the product itself

5 Conclusions and future research directions

This study has investigated the core process within Food and Fashion supply chains,

i.e. PD. The first analysis has been a literature review about the PD process, its main

tasks and the role of PLM, as a software and as a strategic business approach. Academic

research is poor in terms of contribution related to PD in the Food and Fashion indus-

tries. Hence, with the aim to analyse the main critical success factors in the two sectors,

the PD activities and information management through PLM, a case study research has

been performed. Two samples, one including fashion companies and the other one in-

cluding food firms, have been identified and two different questionnaires (with the

same structure) have been administered. The respondents from the fashion industry

were high-end and low-end fashion companies: in three cases a PLM solution has been

already implemented. The interviewed food companies managed different product cat-

egories (fresh products, pasta and canned food and confectionery products) and two

cases have adopted a PLM solution. According to the case study analysis, the CSFs

common to both the industries are product quality, TTM and innovation, while the chal-

lenges that these companies are facing appear to be more industry-specific.

The interviews have also allowed to deepen how PD process and information are

managed in Food and Fashion companies: activities, PLM functionalities and the inter-

faces with other software solutions have been detailed in Figure 1 and 2. Finally, a

comparison between the two sectors has been performed, aiming at finding commonal-

ities and differences. The main similarities that the authors have found are: importance

of the PD process, customer-centric product design, importance of product innovation,

high number of items managed and importance of industry-specific PLM solutions.

Although, the following differences have been noticed: issues related to regulatory

compliance, issues related to product obsolescence, differences in the sale channels,

differences in data model and different customer perception of product design.

The results might be relevant for academics, because of the lack of researches con-

cerning Food and Fashion PD. From the practitioners’ point of view, the results of this

work will help Food and Fashion companies to support their business, analysing the PD

process and to better understand how the use of the PLM system could improve it.

A cross fertilization may be an interesting development of this research, allowing

fashion companies to learn best practices related to PD and PLM from food firms and

vice versa: for example, fashion products might be refined in their packaging and food

industry might learn from the fashion product capability to be often renewed. Moreo-

ver, if we consider a particular merchandise category within the fashion industry, i.e.

cosmetics, more commonalities will be found with the food companies, as the im-

portance of regulatory issues. Cosmetics and food are also similar in terms of data

model, because products are recipe-based, so that several PLM vendors have developed

solutions fitting both the industries. A case study analysis might be performed in cos-

metics companies, for their “fashion” nature and their affinity with food products. Other

topics will be examined with a cross-industry approach: PD and PLM KPIs, PLM data

model and the concept of “lean value chain”. Finally, in order to close the examination

of the three F driving “Made in Italy” to its success, several cases related to the Furni-

ture industry might be included and analysed.

6 References

1. G. Aiello, R. Donvito, L. Grazzini, C. Halliburton, B. Wagner, J. Wilson, B. Godey, D.

Pederzoli, and I. Shokola, “An international comparison of ‘Made in Italy’ in the fashion,

furniture and food sectors: An observational research study in France, Russia and The United

Kingdom,” J. Glob. Fash. Mark., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 136–149, 2015.

2. Coldiretti, “I valori dell’agroalimentare italiano nell’indagine Coldiretti-Swg (16-10-

2009),” 2009. [Online]. Available: http://www.coldiretti.it/News/Pagine/770---16-10-

2009.aspx.

3. M. Fisher, “What is the right supply chain for your product.pdf,” in Harvard Business

Review, 1997, vol. 2, pp. 105–16.

4. M. Christopher, H. Peck, and D. R. Towill, “A taxonomy for selecting global supply chain

strategies,” The, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 277–287, 2006.

5. M. Christopher, R. Lowson, and H. Peck, “Creating agile supply chains in the fashion

industry.,” Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag., vol. 32, no. 8, pp. 367–376, 2004.

6. J. D. Bloom and C. C. Hinrichs, “Moving local food through conventional food system

infrastructure: Value chain framework comparisons and insights,” Renew. Agric. Food Syst.,

vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 13–23, 2011.

7. J. G. Van Der Vorst, “Chapter 2: Performance Measurement in Agri-Food Supply Chain

Networks, An Overview,” Quantifying agri-food supply Chain, pp. 13–24, 2006.

8. G. Gereffi and J. Lee, “A Global Value Chain Approach to Food Safety and Quality

Standards,” America (NY)., vol. Global Hea, p. 52, 2009.

9. D. H. Taylor, “Value chain analysis: an approach to supply chain improvement in agri-food

chains.,” Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag., vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 744–761, 2005.

10. J. G. A. J. van der Vorst, A. J. M. Beulens, W. de Wit, and P. van Beek, “Supply Chain

Management in Food Chains: Improving Performance by Reducing Uncertainty,” Int. Trans.

Oper. Res., vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 487–499, 1998.

11. A. K. Zokaei and D. W. Simons, “Value chain analysis in consumer focus improvement: A

case study of the UK red meat industry,” Int. J. Logist. Manag., vol. 17, pp. 141–162, 2006.

12. M. Christopher, “The Agile Supply Chain,” Ind. Mark. Manag., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 37–44,

2000.

13. A. Şen, “The US fashion industry: A supply chain review,” Int. J. Prod. Econ., vol. 114, no.

2, pp. 571–593, 2008.

14. L. Barnes and G. Lea-Greenwood, “Fast Fashioning the supply chain: shaping the research

agenda,” J. Fash. Mark. Manag., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 259–271, 2006.

15. E. d’Avolio, R. Bandinelli, and R. Rinaldi, “Improving new product development in the

fashion industry through product lifecycle management: a descriptive analysis,” Int. J. Fash.

Des. Technol. Educ., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 108–121, May 2015.

16. F. Segonds, F. Mantelet, J. Nelson, and S. Gaillard, “Proposition of a PLM tool to support

textile design: A case study applied to the definition of the early stages of design

requirements,” Comput. Ind., vol. 66, pp. 21–30, 2015.

17. M. Jacob and E. Jonnro, “The drivers and factors influencing PLM adoption and selection,”

no. September, 2015.

18. G. H. Young, “PLM AND THE FOOD & BEVERAGE INDUSTRY Conquering the Food

Proving Value at Heinz,” Agile Software Corporation. 2004.

19. D. Kiritsis, A. Bufardi, and P. Xirouchakis, “Research issues on product lifecycle

management and information tracking using smart embedded systems,” Adv. Eng.

Informatics, vol. 17, no. 3–4, pp. 189–202, 2003.

20. S. Terzi, A. A. Bouras, D. Dutta, M. Garetti, D. Kiritsis, and M. Garetti, “Product lifecycle

management – from its history to its new role,” Int. J. Prod. Lifecycle Manag.,

vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 360–389, 2010.

21. G. Schuh, H. Rozenfeld, D. Assmus, and E. Zancul, “Process oriented framework to support

PLM implementation,” Comput. Ind., vol. 59, no. 2–3, pp. 210–218, 2008.

22. F. Ameri and D. Dutta, “Product lifecycle management: Closing the knowledge loops,”

Comput. Aided. Des. Appl., vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 577–590, 2005.

23. R. K. Yin, Case Study Research Design and Methods, 4th ed., vol. 5. 2009.

24. R. K. Yin, “Case Study Research . Design and Methods,” SAGE Publications, vol. 26, no.

1. pp. 93–96, 2003.

25. R. Cooper and E. Kleinschmidt, “Benchmarking the firm’s critical success factors in new

product development,” J. Prod. Innov. Manag., vol. 12, pp. 71–85, 1995.

26. R. G. . B. Cooper and E. J. . Kleinschmidt, “Winning businesses in product development:

The critical success factors,” Res. Technol. Manag., vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 52–66, 2007.

27. S. Saviolo and S. Testa, Le imprese del sistema moda: Il management al servizio della

creatività. Etas, 2005.

28. R. Verganti, “Design, meanings and radical innovation: A research agenda,” J. Prod. Innov.

Manag., vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 436–456, 2008.